Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Federal Judiciary Blogs -> Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice

Federal Judiciary

: Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice

Marshall False Marking cases update part 1: the fog lifts (and real quick too)

By Michael C. Smith

It took Judge Ward just under fifteen minutes to address the common issues in false marking cases pending in his court by ruling on the pending motions in the first three status conferences.  Generally speaking, the rulings are these:

• Motion to dismiss seeking more definite statement were denied - pending further guidance from the Federal Circuit, the Court believes that FRCP 8 applies, and the pleadings were sufficient under that standard.
• Motions to transfer filed by the defendant in the one of the three in which it was filed (a single-defendant case) was granted from the bench (as I write this, patent lawyers are literally scattering across the Marshall square in search of computers, typewriters, and even Putt-Putt penciles to file motions to transfer where they were not already).  There were no motions to transfer in the multi-defendant case, or in the other single-defendant case, as tas the ruling was from the bench, no written order at the moment.
• Cases were set for jury selection June 6, 2012 - plaintiff and defendant alike agreed that discovery could be conducted in time for this trial date, which is about the norm for non-patent cases in Marshall.  Parties were given 14 days to prepare and submit scheduling and discovery orders in line with the Court's usual practices.  Trial would be on the liability issue, with the Court to set damages.

The nice thing about being acxross the street is that I can walk over and write this post, then head back for the next round of cases at 10:00.

Full post as published by Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice on November 23, 2010 (boomark / email).